The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three months and by a fine of 400,000 won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) declared by the court below is too unfasible.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The summary of the facts charged 1) An employer shall clearly state the wages, contractual work hours, holidays, annual paid leave, and other working conditions prescribed by Presidential Decree to workers when concluding an employment contract, and shall deliver a written statement specifying the matters such as the constituent items, calculation method, payment method, contractual work hours, etc. of wages to the employees. Nevertheless, the Defendant did not issue a written document stating the matters such as the constituent items, calculation method, payment method, contractual work hours, etc. of wages to G around November 15, 2010 in each labor contract with F on February 15, 201, in each labor contract with G and F on February 15, 2011. (2) The crime of violating the Labor Standards Act due to non-issuance of a written working condition clearly stating the determined working conditions is an offense under Articles 114 and 17 of the Labor Standards Act, and the statute of limitations is five years pursuant to Article 249(1)5 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

However, according to the facts charged in violation of the Labor Standards Act due to the failure to provide the above working conditions in writing, the Defendant did not deliver the document specifying the working conditions when concluding each labor contract with G on November 15, 201 and F on February 15, 2011. Thus, each of the above crimes committed is completed on November 15, 201 and February 15, 201, respectively.

However, since the prosecution of this case was instituted on February 29, 2016, five years after the date of entering into each of the above labor contracts, and the statute of limitations has expired, the part concerning the conclusion of the labor contract with G and F among the facts charged of violating the Labor Standards Act due to non-issuance of the above working conditions in writing should be acquitted pursuant to Article 326 subparagraph 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below was pronounced guilty of each of the above facts charged.